1. The appeal against the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the reasoning of the judgment, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the portion added as follows, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. On the 17th anniversary of the judgment of the first instance, the addition shall add the following:

The defendant asserts that "the first floor of the building in this case is the common use area of apartment and commercial building, and since the plaintiff management body has exclusively used and used the building from 2007 to the management office, the apartment owner's co-ownership right of the apartment among the building in this case is infringed and thus, the rent for the building is equivalent to the rent for the building. Whether the part is a common use area or a common use area of the building in this case shall be determined at the time of establishment of the divided ownership, that is, as a matter of principle, at the time of the completion of the whole building and the registration of the section in the building ledger as a sectional ownership. It shall not affect whether the building is a common use area or a common use area. The issue of which part is offered to all or some of the sectional owners of the aggregate building shall be determined by the objective use according to the structure of the building, unless there is an agreement among the owners of the common use area or a common use area. Therefore, it is necessary to maintain the safety or appearance of the building as a common use area or a common use area.